Distinguishing Subtypes of Mutual Violence in the Context of Self-Defense: Classifying Types of Partner Violent Couples Using a Modified Conflict Tactics Scale

Babcock, Julia C.; Snead, Alexandra L.; Bennett, Victoria E.; Armenti, Nicholas A.

doi:10.1007/s10896-018-0012-2

Cited by 29 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Future studies should address these limitations by replicating this research on predominantly Hispanic clinical or relationally distressed community couples and examine male and female IPV dichotomously and continuously. Previous research screening community couples for moderate to high relationship distress have found most couples to report IPV occurrences [ 65 ]. Thus, assessing male and female IPV as continuous variables may be appropriate in future research examining attachment and IPV in Hispanic community couples if couples are screened using similar methods [ 65 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research screening community couples for moderate to high relationship distress have found most couples to report IPV occurrences [ 65 ]. Thus, assessing male and female IPV as continuous variables may be appropriate in future research examining attachment and IPV in Hispanic community couples if couples are screened using similar methods [ 65 ]. Additionally, future research should expand on the current study by examining the relationships between partners’ attachment dimensions, emotion dysregulation, and other forms of IPV, such as sexual coercion and psychological abuse, by measuring them using self-reports and partner reports of male-perpetrated and female-perpetrated IPV.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Attachment, Emotion Dysregulation, and Physical IPV in Predominantly Hispanic, Young Adult Couples

Pollard

Cantos

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insecure attachment has been found to be a risk factor for perpetrating physical intimate partner violence (IPV). However, this association is likely exacerbated by additional factors, such as conflicting insecure attachment in one’s partner and difficulties with overall emotion regulation and impulse control. The present study aimed to examine the associations between insecure attachment and physical IPV perpetration in male and female partners, as well as to examine whether these associations are exacerbated by involvement with a partner with opposing attachment needs and overall emotion dysregulation and impulsivity. Additionally, this study examined whether partners’ emotion dysregulation interacted to predict IPV. Two hundred eight heterosexual couples primarily recruited from a Hispanic-serving university completed questionnaires on attachment, emotion dysregulation, and one’s own and one’s partner’s perpetration. Results revealed that attachment anxiety, impulsivity, and an interaction effect between attachment avoidance and partner’s attachment anxiety were associated with self-reported, but not partner-reported, male perpetration. For females, attachment anxiety was associated with female IPV (self-reported and partner-reported), and impulsivity was associated with self-reported female IPV. Overall, results underscore how relationships between known risk factors and IPV perpetration may differ depending on if IPV perpetration is measured using self-reported or partner-reported data. Additional results and implications are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attachment, Emotion Dysregulation, and Physical IPV in Predominantly Hispanic, Young Adult Couples

Pollard

Cantos

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We have no information about to what extent, assessed problems were already (partly) present before the events, and have no information about partner violence in the years before the year prior to the surveys. In addition, we did not collect data on the perpetrator of PPV and, as a result, do not know how multiple problems relate to dyadic forms of PPV, whereas previous research has shown that a substantial amount of PPV is part of dyadic violence (e.g., Babcock, Snead, Bennett, & Armenti, 2019;Kessler, Molnar, Feurer, & Appelbaum, 2001). Previous research on perpetrators convicted of PPV has shown that, like victims, these perpetrators experience multiple problems (van der Knaap, el Idrissi, & Bogaerts, 2013), and in terms of preventing recurring PPV, it may prove useful to further assess these relationships in future research.…”

Section: Limitations and Strengthsmentioning

confidence: 95%

From Health to Financial Problems: Multiproblems Among Victims of Partner and Non-Partner Physical Violence, and Matched Nonvictims

Velden

Das

Contino

et al. 2019

J Interpers Violence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research suggests that victims of partner physical violence (PPV) often face multiple distinct problems, but comparative population-based studies focusing on the prevalence of multiple problems are lacking. Aim of the present study is to gain insight in the prevalence of multiple problems among individuals victimized by PPV in the past 12 months, compared with matched nonvictims and victims of non-partner physical violence (non-PPV). For this purpose, data were extracted from two population-based surveys conducted in 2018 and 2019 on potentially traumatic events in the Netherlands. We focused on problems identified in previous studies on PPV and non-PPV and related problems, varying from physical health, mental health, financial and legal problems, to lack of social support and being exposed to other potentially traumatic and stressful life events (LFEs). In total, 49 respondents were victimized by PPV and 89 by non-PPV in the past 12 months. They were compared with pairwise matched groups not affected by any traumatic or stressful LFEs in this period ( nPPV victims comparison group = 245, nnon-PPV comparison group = 445). Results showed that PPV victims significantly more often faced all 12 distinct problems than matched nonvictims (2.31 ≤ odds ratio [OR] ≤ 15.48) and non-PPV victims (2.12 ≤ OR ≤ 4.52). PPV victims more often had any problem than non-PPV victims (OR = 8.19), but no significant differences were found between PPV and non-PPV victims with regard to mental health problems. Findings stress the necessity of a multidisciplinary coordinated community response to help PPV victims.

show abstract

“…For example, the definitions of self-defense in this review were varied and as previously mentioned, were frequently conflated with retaliation. This is an issue that has previously been raised by multiple researchers (e.g., Babcock et al, 2019;Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al, 2012;Leisring, 2013). Therefore, we recommend future researchers use the legal definition for self-defense to bring consistency to this construct (see Garner & Black, 2014, p. 1565.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 97%

Control and Intimate Partner Aggression

Dempsey¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>Control is fundamental to theoretical conceptualizations of intimate partner aggression (IPA). In particular, it has been instrumental in the development of typologies of IPA, where control has been associated with more frequent and serious IPA carried out by men against women. Consequently, the concept of control has heavily influenced the design of treatment and legislation targeting partner violence. However, there is considerable theoretical divergence as to how control should be conceptualized, operationalized, and measured. This thesis comprises a series of studies designed to test the validity of some of the key theoretical assumptions that inform the common conceptualizations of control by examining control as a behavior, as a motivation, and as an outcome. Chapter 1 provides an overview of the thesis rationale and objectives. Chapter 2 investigated the theoretical assumption that non-physical ‘controlling behaviors’ (e.g., restricting access to money; threatening harm) comprise a unique form of IPA. Exploratory (N = 561) and confirmatory (N = 424) factor analyses on 54 measures used across the IPA literature identified three forms of aggression: Eclectic Aggression, Direct Psychological Aggression, Monitoring Acts. There was no evidence for a distinct form of ‘controlling behaviors’. Chapter 3 systematically reviewed the literature on motivations for physical and psychological IPA. The review aimed to appraise the quality of the literature and ascertain which motivations had the largest effect sizes. A meta-analysis of the motivations for physical IPA suggested self-defense, retaliation for emotional hurt, and communication difficulties had larger effect sizes than control. Chapter 4 investigated the assumptions that control motivations are associated with more severe and frequent IPA and IPA perpetrated by men. Categorical principal and latent class analyses (N = 1166) found considerable heterogeneity in motivations for IPA for both genders, but no evidence of distinct patterns or profiles of controlling motivations for either men or women. Chapter 5 investigated the assumptions that coercive control is experienced exclusively by women and is related to experiencing specific types and more frequent IPA (N = 1174). Evidence did not support a “coercive control” pattern or profile in people who experienced IPA, or that coercive control outcomes were gendered, or associated with the type or the frequency of IPA behaviors used. Regressing the item-average of coercive control outcomes on experiences of IPA in a path analysis provided some evidence that gender and experiences of physical and psychological aggression predicted feelings of coercive control. Collectively, the results of the thesis identified considerable heterogeneity in the patterns of behaviors, motivations and outcomes for IPA. The evidence challenges existing conceptualizations of control as a distinct and gendered construct and indicates the need for the development of a theoretical explanation of control, that is both gender-inclusive and multi-factorial, to guide future research.</p>

show abstract

Distinguishing Subtypes of Mutual Violence in the Context of Self-Defense: Classifying Types of Partner Violent Couples Using a Modified Conflict Tactics Scale

Cited by 29 publications

References 47 publications

Attachment, Emotion Dysregulation, and Physical IPV in Predominantly Hispanic, Young Adult Couples

Attachment, Emotion Dysregulation, and Physical IPV in Predominantly Hispanic, Young Adult Couples

From Health to Financial Problems: Multiproblems Among Victims of Partner and Non-Partner Physical Violence, and Matched Nonvictims

Control and Intimate Partner Aggression

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About